Re: Difference between AN UNKNOWN and UNKNOWN
examachine_at_gmail.com
Date: 01/09/05
- Next message: Media Watch: "Re: MAYBE YOU WILL ANSWER A MULTI CHOICE ???"
- Previous message: ernobe: "Re: what our mind is for."
- In reply to: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: Difference between AN UNKNOWN and UNKNOWN"
- Next in thread: Will Twentyman: "Re: Difference between AN UNKNOWN and UNKNOWN"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 9 Jan 2005 15:53:57 -0800
The problem is, he sometimes made interesting observations,
unfortunately for him the bogus material far overweighs them. For
instance, he shouldn't be abusing the newsgroups by posting all that
often, etc.
As for the 4 "proofs" you cite, no I don't think they are proofs. I do
think that there is something wrong with our concept of R, or in
general of infinity, but this does not mean that reals are denumerable,
or Omega, a random real, is computable, etc. Rather, you have an
altogether different set of philosophical conclusions, none of which
has any relation to these most unapplied aspects of mathematics, or
anything that should really concern a working mathematician. At least
not now.
What he really wants to say is, if the world is a digital computer, in
this case, the ontological claims in our mathematical statements must
be evaluated accordingly. That's a lot different from saying that 1/3
is in that set, whatever that is supposed to mean.
Regards,
-- Eray
- Next message: Media Watch: "Re: MAYBE YOU WILL ANSWER A MULTI CHOICE ???"
- Previous message: ernobe: "Re: what our mind is for."
- In reply to: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: Difference between AN UNKNOWN and UNKNOWN"
- Next in thread: Will Twentyman: "Re: Difference between AN UNKNOWN and UNKNOWN"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
